Conceptual Change and Developmental Teaching: Comment on Gennen.

P-prims were the main initial motivation for the moniker "knowledge in pieces", although other knowledge ontologies in the larger KiP epistemology show how p-prims and other knowledge elements can be combined and organized into working, normative scientific concepts. And/or it might be the accidental fact that the DT traditions simply do not include computation in either experiential modes (new intuitive pools of knowledge) or in knowledge-representational modes (what expert knowledge might look like, mediated by new, computational forms). I am happy to provide a commentary on Thomas Gennen's article (this issue) on the relation between conceptual change research and developmental teaching (DT), the latter referring to what might be described as neo-Vygotskian approaches to educational problems largely instigated in Soviet-era Russian psychology and educational work. Artificial Words and Real Experience I might be a little overly sensitive to the issue, but I found the grounding of student knowledge in real-world experience overdone in Gennen's report on the basics of DT. [Extracted from the article]